Re: PESO -Plates

[David Mann]

I dare you to hop across them :D

Cheers,
Dave

On Jan 24, 2014, at 6:43 pm, knarf  wrote:

> I think it's really cool the way ice forms in large plates when the water's 
> calm:
> 
> http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2014/01/plates.html?m=1
> 
> Went for high key bw. 
> 
> Hope you enjoy. Comments welcome.
> 
> Cheers,
> frank
> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[knarf]

Isn't that always the way.

LOL

cheers,
frank

Walt  wrote:
>In that situation, I figure he would have said, "I'd *just* set my
>video 
>camera down when I heard the gunfire."
>
>-- Walt
>
>
>On 1/24/2014 1:37 AM, knarf wrote:
>> "Oh, excuse me, you there, man with the AK47! Yes, could you just go
>back and run past again? Wait, before you go back just let me get a
>spot reading off your forehead. Okay, just a sec, I want to get a nice
>wide aperture, set this thing for bracketing and, yes I just want to
>pull back on the exposure a bit, maybe -.7 or -1 stop at the most
>OKAY, try again but maybe look a bit more determined, okay? Grit your
>teeth or something. Yes, much better, let's go then, give me one
>more take, er, I mean try!"
>>
>> Cheers,
>> frank
>>
>> Walt 
>>> What's funny is that, with a wider aperture, spot metering, and some
>>> exposure compensation, it might never have been an issue.
>>>
>>> -- Walt
>> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>PDML@pdml.net
>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>follow the directions.

“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Walt]

In that situation, I figure he would have said, "I'd *just* set my video 
camera down when I heard the gunfire."


-- Walt


On 1/24/2014 1:37 AM, knarf wrote:

"Oh, excuse me, you there, man with the AK47! Yes, could you just go back and run 
past again? Wait, before you go back just let me get a spot reading off your forehead. 
Okay, just a sec, I want to get a nice wide aperture, set this thing for bracketing and, 
yes I just want to pull back on the exposure a bit, maybe -.7 or -1 stop at the most 
OKAY, try again but maybe look a bit more determined, okay? Grit your teeth or something. 
Yes, much better, let's go then, give me one more take, er, I mean try!"

Cheers,
frank

Walt 

What's funny is that, with a wider aperture, spot metering, and some
exposure compensation, it might never have been an issue.

-- Walt

“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[knarf]

"Oh, excuse me, you there, man with the AK47! Yes, could you just go back and 
run past again? Wait, before you go back just let me get a spot reading off 
your forehead. Okay, just a sec, I want to get a nice wide aperture, set this 
thing for bracketing and, yes I just want to pull back on the exposure a bit, 
maybe -.7 or -1 stop at the most OKAY, try again but maybe look a bit more 
determined, okay? Grit your teeth or something. Yes, much better, let's go 
then, give me one more take, er, I mean try!"

Cheers,
frank

Walt  
>
>What's funny is that, with a wider aperture, spot metering, and some 
>exposure compensation, it might never have been an issue.
>
>-- Walt

“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Walt]

On 1/24/2014 12:24 AM, Tom C wrote:

On 23/01/2014 9:49 PM, Tom C wrote:

The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.

---

That's because your basic assumption is a flawed premise. The picture
doesn't represent the truth, it represents a reflection of the truth.

The Old Ones know the truth, but they have long since gone beyond the Rim.

bill



I understand your point, an image is a reflection/rendering of a
narrow reality at that point in space-time in the direction the camera
was pointing. :)

For "photo-journalism" to say an image is untruthful or has no
integrity because an object is removed, is fallacious at best and
hypocritical at worst, because a like image taken from a slightly
different vantage point would also eliminate that object and still be
considered truthful. If the object removed was done so with the intent
of altering the message, that's different.

Subtraction is the basic process of composition. Other alterations or
additions have more to do with changing the integrity of the image. I
have a real problem with additions or moving of objects in an image.
Alterations to achieve a desired effect, be it exposure, contrast,
saturation, are in many respects the bread and butter of
non-documentary photography.

Tom C.


What's funny is that, with a wider aperture, spot metering, and some 
exposure compensation, it might never have been an issue.


-- Walt

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

On 23/01/2014 9:49 PM, Tom C wrote:

The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.

---

That's because your basic assumption is a flawed premise. The picture
doesn't represent the truth, it represents a reflection of the truth.

The Old Ones know the truth, but they have long since gone beyond the Rim.

bill



I understand your point, an image is a reflection/rendering of a
narrow reality at that point in space-time in the direction the camera
was pointing. :)

For "photo-journalism" to say an image is untruthful or has no
integrity because an object is removed, is fallacious at best and
hypocritical at worst, because a like image taken from a slightly
different vantage point would also eliminate that object and still be
considered truthful. If the object removed was done so with the intent
of altering the message, that's different.

Subtraction is the basic process of composition. Other alterations or
additions have more to do with changing the integrity of the image. I
have a real problem with additions or moving of objects in an image.
Alterations to achieve a desired effect, be it exposure, contrast,
saturation, are in many respects the bread and butter of
non-documentary photography.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 24/01/2014 12:01 AM, Tom C wrote:

  Bill wrote:

At the same time, there is that which we are willing to accept as a
truthful representation, even though it cannot be unaltered and still
be something we can hold in our hands and say "this really sucks"

What you guys are saying is that if you have an insurance claim, you
might as well Photoshop in some more damage since the evidence picture
isn't the truth anyway.

Have a spat with your boyfriend? Just Photoshop in a black eye and
make it look like he split your lip and knocked out a couple of teeth.
Get that f#cker sent to jail for bringing home Pepperoni and mushroom
rather than ham and pineapple. He won't make that mistake twice.

It doesn't matter, since whatever you use as evidence is a lie anyway.



Now you know that's not what I'm saying.


I don't know anything of the sort. You know full well it's just the kind 
of thing you would say.


In that image of interest, if a bloody body was photo-shopped out or
in, that would be crossing the line, especially if it was supposed to
DOCUMENT the scene at that place at that point in time. If the image
is not meant to document something, but instead be illustrative, then
removing or cropping a distracting item does not alter the message any
more than panning the camera alters the message. In the case of the
image in question, the superfluous video camera was never part of the
intended message to begin with.



But it still changes the context of the picture, however slightly. And 
then, you have the dirty job of deciding where the line is, and at some 
point, an image is going to slip through that belongs on the Commentary 
and Viewpoints page, not a hard news page.

And then credibility is pretty much lost forever.

You are saying that it is possible to be a little bit pregnant.

bill


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

 Bill wrote:

At the same time, there is that which we are willing to accept as a
truthful representation, even though it cannot be unaltered and still
be something we can hold in our hands and say "this really sucks"

What you guys are saying is that if you have an insurance claim, you
might as well Photoshop in some more damage since the evidence picture
isn't the truth anyway.

Have a spat with your boyfriend? Just Photoshop in a black eye and
make it look like he split your lip and knocked out a couple of teeth.
Get that f#cker sent to jail for bringing home Pepperoni and mushroom
rather than ham and pineapple. He won't make that mistake twice.

It doesn't matter, since whatever you use as evidence is a lie anyway.



Now you know that's not what I'm saying.

In that image of interest, if a bloody body was photo-shopped out or
in, that would be crossing the line, especially if it was supposed to
DOCUMENT the scene at that place at that point in time. If the image
is not meant to document something, but instead be illustrative, then
removing or cropping a distracting item does not alter the message any
more than panning the camera alters the message. In the case of the
image in question, the superfluous video camera was never part of the
intended message to begin with.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Ken Waller]

In another lifetime, as an expert witness, doing forensic photography, when 
I testified regarding evidence photography, I had to have the negatives that 
went with the images I was testifying about, to prove they images were 
unaltered. We had just started using digital when I retired and were already 
aware of programs that could tell if a digital image had been altered since 
capture.


Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller

- Original Message - 
From: "Larry Colen" 

Subject: Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping



On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 05:30:59PM -0600, Bill wrote:

On 23/01/2014 2:08 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
>
>I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
>The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
>whatever the photo presents.
>
>It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
>the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
>modification.
>While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
>when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
>But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
>it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on 
>the

>photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
>on a part of the photograph.
>
>I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
>but that's totally different.
>I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
>molehill.

A couple of things:
1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should
be as unmanipulated as possible.
2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make
manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being
presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?

We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude
to look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our
perception of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes
extreme contrast manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing
or adding subject matter, in fact anything that is done with the
intention of obscuring what was actually in front of the camera.
For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to
alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive
manipulation.


You forgot about cropping out things that you don't want visible
in the final photo, and carefully composing the shot so that those
details aren't even in the picture in the first place.

Tools like photoshop just make it easier to perform some of the
sorts of subterfuge that photographers have been doing for
decades.



bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
follow the directions.


--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com 
http://red4est.com/lrc



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO -Plates

[knarf]

I think it's really cool the way ice forms in large plates when the water's 
calm:

http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2014/01/plates.html?m=1

Went for high key bw. 

Hope you enjoy. Comments welcome.

Cheers,
frank
“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 9:49 PM, Tom C wrote:



The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.



That's because your basic assumption is a flawed premise. The picture 
doesn't represent the truth, it represents a reflection of the truth.


The Old Ones know the truth, but they have long since gone beyond the Rim.

bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 11:18 PM, Bruce wrote:

I couldn't have said it better myself Tom.  The entire concept of
photography is to create an image from the mind/concept/perspective
of the photographer.  To think that any photograph represents the
unaltered truth is ridiculous.



At the same time, there is that which we are willing to accept as a 
truthful representation, even though it cannot be unaltered and still be 
something we can hold in our hands and say "this really sucks"


What you guys are saying is that if you have an insurance claim, you 
might as well Photoshop in some more damage since the evidence picture 
isn't the truth anyway.


Have a spat with your boyfriend? Just Photoshop in a black eye and make 
it look like he split your lip and knocked out a couple of teeth. Get 
that f#cker sent to jail for bringing home Pepperoni and mushroom rather 
than ham and pineapple. He won't make that mistake twice.

It doesn't matter, since whatever you use as evidence is a lie anyway.

bill


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bruce]

I couldn't have said it better myself Tom.  The entire concept of photography 
is to create an image from the mind/concept/perspective of the photographer.  
To think that any photograph represents the unaltered truth is ridiculous.

--
Bruce

Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 7:49 PM, Tom C  wrote:
> 
> John wrote:
> 
>> If you draw the line at "nothing added, nothing removed" no one can
>> argue about how much has been changed in the story the image tells.
> 
>> There's really nowhere else you can draw that line without it being
>> challenged.
> 
> I totally understand what you and others are saying, and I do get the
> point 100%.
> 
> The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
> entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
> TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.
> 
> First, those photons pass through the lens and are bent in order to be
> recorded on the media or detected by the sensor. As Bill noted, that
> can drastically change the look of an image. So what focal length
> represents truth (not to mention DOF)? Exposure?
> 
> Then those recordings pass through digital circuitry and are changed.
> Then they are manipulated internally by software to render a
> 2-dimensional *version* of what was there in 3 dimensions.  Enough
> said.
> 
> The other issue is that were I to pan the camera in any direction by
> any amount, I'd end up with a different image. The mere act of
> pressing the shutter release includes photons entering the lens and
> making it through the aperture and discards those not lucky enough to
> do so.
> 
> So right there we could consider that elements of truth were included
> while others were discarded, all because of where the photographer was
> pointing the camera, be it somewhat arbitrarily or deliberately. Did
> the captured image represent what was really there or did the
> photographer deliberately include some elements while deliberately
> excluding others? Is that what it looked like to the naked human eye
> or was perspective and focus point changed?  Was the intent nefarious
> in making those choices or benevolent?
> 
> I contend photography of any kind is ALL ABOUT deciding what IS
> captured and what is NOT. That is the essence of photography and
> composition. To state that any captured image unequivocally represents
> THE TRUTH is simply incorrect. To say that changing image content at
> capture time or afterwards changes the TRUTHFULNESS of the image is
> false.
> 
> Tom C.
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Dinon, Monday afternoon

[Bruce]

Rick,

Capturing the lone person crossing the street was just perfect to emphasize the 
emptiness.  I also like the vertical shooting which helps to show a large 
expanse of the street.  Nice shot!

--
Bruce


Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 22, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Rick Womer  wrote:
> 
> Another from last March: Dinon is a medieval town in Brittany, and on Mondays 
> (in March, anyway) it's VERY quiet.  We walked the streets all day, and saw 
> few other people. This was near the center of town, just after mid-day:
> 
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17661143
> 
> or
> 
> http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17661143-lg.jpg
> 
> 
>  
> http://photo.net/photos/RickW
> 
> (K-5, DA 16-45)
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Product shots with an overhead light panel

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 6:27 PM, Darren Addy wrote:



Comments and criticism welcome.





The first one is OK, though I find the reflection distracting.
The second one is visually very confusing. Have you considered using a 
peice of white sign plastic as the sweep and lighting it from below to 
blow out the shadows? It can be very effective, and you can gel the 
light(s) to put some colour in if you like.


bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 6:02 PM, Miserere wrote:



And yes, I've been salivating at that upcoming Fuji X-T1 too. It looks
just like the LXD I hoped Pentax would release someday... Sigh...



The Fuji lenses are really nice, too.

bill


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 9:38 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:



AP has likely set this absolute standard because they believe that as
soon as the  public who views their photographs or the editors who buy
them *start* do doubt their veracity even a little it's a slippery
slope they won't be able to get off. And that would be the end of
their business.




Yeah. Faux News can't afford to hire everybody.

bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Aahz Maruch]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> The Olympus OM-D E-M1 is indeed a looker, although some seem to
> prefer the looks of the E-M5 more (it's smaller and has less of a
> grip). Both are excellent cameras. I prefer the larger camera for the
> superb ergonomics it affords, it's improved viewfinder, and many other
> details of its design. Terrific camera indeed.

After renting the E-M5, E-M1, GX7, and GM1 for a week, I think the E-M5
is a piece of shit.  The E-M5 without the half-grip actually is less
comfortable than the tiny GM1.  The other three are good, but the E-M1 is
definitely best.

If you're looking into m43, I highly recommend renting several bodies;
I've owned the Panasonic G3 in the past, and I hated the E-PL5 in less
than five minutes.  Other people have different reactions, so caveat
emptor!

Overall, I think the E-M1 is most likely to feel comfortable to someone
who likes Pentax.  ;-)
-- 
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/
  <*>   <*>   <*>
Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 7:32 PM, Tom C wrote:

From: Bill 

A couple of things:
1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should be
as unmanipulated as possible.
2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make
manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being
presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?


Was that the case here? What was the subject of the photo? The soldier
or the video camera?

If I pick up a candy bar wrapper that's littering the foreground in a
landscape shot is that wrong? No. If I clone it out afterwards when I
notice it. Is that wrong? No.


You are right, and I am guilty of doing the same thing. However, I am 
making art to hang on a wall, not selling war pictures to a newspaper.


This wasn't a case of a photographer manipulating a photo with intent
to mislead the viewer. It was case of cloning out an unimportant
element. What viewer looked at it and thought, 'Wow there's supposed
to be a video camera down in the corner'?


But it does, in it's own way, manipulate the viewer. With the video 
camera in, the picture can have a somewhat different interpretation. 
With the video camera in, they could almost be shooting on a movie set.





We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude to
look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our perception
of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes extreme contrast
manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing or adding subject
matter, in fact anything that is done with the intention of obscuring
what was actually in front of the camera.
For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to
alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive manipulation.

bill


Come now, come now. You make me spit my wine out! Mr. Lens Inventory.


My stuff is closer Aunt Maude than Walter Cronkite.

bill


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Jack Davis]

What a unique shot!
Love it.

Jack




- Original Message -
From: Walt 
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List 
Cc: 
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 1:52 PM
Subject: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert 
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.

Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: A Camera for Jim King

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 6:01 PM, Miserere wrote:

I have a camera for Jim King. Behold the King Jim camera!:

http://akihabaranews.com/2014/01/15/article-en/king-jim-camera-equipped-mouse-1534514126

It even comes with an accessory mouse, ahem.



I could see that being very useful if it works well as a mouse.

bill


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

John wrote:

>  If you draw the line at "nothing added, nothing removed" no one can
> argue about how much has been changed in the story the image tells.

> There's really nowhere else you can draw that line without it being
> challenged.

I totally understand what you and others are saying, and I do get the
point 100%.

The problem I see is that there's a basic assumption that the photons
entering the lens and recorded on the media somehow represent THE
TRUTH. I believe that assumption is flawed.

First, those photons pass through the lens and are bent in order to be
recorded on the media or detected by the sensor. As Bill noted, that
can drastically change the look of an image. So what focal length
represents truth (not to mention DOF)? Exposure?

Then those recordings pass through digital circuitry and are changed.
Then they are manipulated internally by software to render a
2-dimensional *version* of what was there in 3 dimensions.  Enough
said.

The other issue is that were I to pan the camera in any direction by
any amount, I'd end up with a different image. The mere act of
pressing the shutter release includes photons entering the lens and
making it through the aperture and discards those not lucky enough to
do so.

So right there we could consider that elements of truth were included
while others were discarded, all because of where the photographer was
pointing the camera, be it somewhat arbitrarily or deliberately. Did
the captured image represent what was really there or did the
photographer deliberately include some elements while deliberately
excluding others? Is that what it looked like to the naked human eye
or was perspective and focus point changed?  Was the intent nefarious
in making those choices or benevolent?

I contend photography of any kind is ALL ABOUT deciding what IS
captured and what is NOT. That is the essence of photography and
composition. To state that any captured image unequivocally represents
THE TRUTH is simply incorrect. To say that changing image content at
capture time or afterwards changes the TRUTHFULNESS of the image is
false.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Dinon, Monday afternoon

[Rick Womer]

Thanks, Brian.

If you travel to Dinon (or similar medieval towns), you will find that 
-nothing- is vertical, including (in this case) the church tower.

Rick

On Jan 23, 2014, at 15:32 , Brian Walters wrote:

> Quoting Rick Womer :
> 
>> Another from last March: Dinon is a medieval town in Brittany, and on 
>> Mondays (in March, anyway) it's VERY quiet.  We walked the streets all 
>> day, and saw few other people. This was near the center of town, just after 
>> mid-day:
>> 
>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17661143
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17661143-lg.jpg
>> 
> 
> 
> Very nice.  The subtle shadows and the human element are very effective.
> 
> I just wish the perspective had been adjusted (I know, I know.  Sorry, it's 
> my engineering background.  I like my verticals to be, well, vertical)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers
> 
> Brian
> 
> ++
> Brian Walters
> Western Sydney Australia
> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Dinon, Monday afternoon

[Rick Womer]

Thanks, Bruce!

On Jan 23, 2014, at 14:49 , Bruce Walker wrote:

> That is really good, Rick. Light, colour, lines; excellent.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Rick Womer  wrote:
>> Another from last March: Dinon is a medieval town in Brittany, and on 
>> Mondays (in March, anyway) it's VERY quiet.  We walked the streets all day, 
>> and saw few other people. This was near the center of town, just after 
>> mid-day:
>> 
>> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17661143
>> 
>> or
>> 
>> http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17661143-lg.jpg
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://photo.net/photos/RickW
>> 
>> (K-5, DA 16-45)
>> 
>> Comments?
>> 
>> Rick
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -bmw
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Mark Roberts]

John wrote:

>If you draw the line at "nothing added, nothing removed" no one can
>argue about how much has been changed in the story the image tells.
>
>There's really nowhere else you can draw that line without it being
>challenged.

Yep. As I pointed out earlier, what's involved here is a three-way
transaction between readers/viewers, editors and the photo agency
(AP). Readers expect that a news photo will show only what was in
front of the camera (seen in the viewfinder) with nothing added or
removed. If one instance is permitted, even if it's insignificant,
they'll be suspicious that other, significant elements may be changed
in other images. Or at least editors are afraid they'll start to think
that way. Same thing, from a business standpoint. AP has set an
absolute standard ("nothing added, nothing removed"). Whether he
approved philosophically or not, the photographer *agreed to these
terms* when he went to work for AP.

AP has likely set this absolute standard because they believe that as
soon as the  public who views their photographs or the editors who buy
them *start* do doubt their veracity even a little it's a slippery
slope they won't be able to get off. And that would be the end of
their business.
 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[John]

If you draw the line at "nothing added, nothing removed" no one can
argue about how much has been changed in the story the image tells.

There's really nowhere else you can draw that line without it being
challenged.


On 1/23/2014 8:10 PM, Tom C wrote:

From: Igor Roshchin 


I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
whatever the photo presents.



It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
modification.
While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
on a part of the photograph.



I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
but that's totally different.
I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
molehill.



Thu Jan 23 13:11:02 EST 2014
Mark Roberts wrote:



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-23/pulitzer-photographer-narciso-conteras-fired-syria-ap/5215200


I agree. If the content removed from an image did not add to the
meaningful information conveyed, then removing it did not subtract
from the meaningful information either and it's still journalistically
'truthful'.

It's ridiculous to moralize on something so trivial when news and
journalistic organizations routinely use file photos to illustrate a
story. Often those photos are far removed from the time and place the
story is about and can be very misleading, yet that's OK and removing
a distracting element is not?   Seems like a double standard to me.

  If the image was a little wider and the video camera could have been
cropped instead of cloned...that's as much a manipulation, as is
cropping in the viewfinder.

I agree with Misere, if words can be edited and changed, to craft the
story, then the same standard should apply to images.

Misleading with an image is obviously wrong.

Photos are not truth and never were.

Tom C.



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Speaking of Journalists

[Ann Sanfedele]

Ditto!

ann

On 1/23/2014 19:52, Daniel J. Matyola wrote:

Great Catch!

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:

Seen at the NAIAS: Jimmy Olsen, cub reporter. Wanted to ask, why the costume? 
But didn’t get a chance to do so.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17660034
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

Two other thoughts came to mind.

1. I think the guy was kind of a dumbass for going to a supervisor and
saying he cloned it out. It's sort of like leaving work 15 minutes
early one day and then telling your boss 'I left early yesterday'. In
the big scheme of things it doesn't matter.

2. Maybe this is a publicity stunt on the part of the photographer. I
wonder how many job offers he's been receiving since that.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - New Polaroid 'Camera'

[John]

The one that holds a roll of toilet paper is more useful.

On 1/23/2014 7:19 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

Say Cheese...

http://tinyurl.com/p2cvlhw




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 is indeed a looker, although some seem to prefer the 
looks of the E-M5 more (it's smaller and has less of a grip). Both are 
excellent cameras. I prefer the larger camera for the superb ergonomics it 
affords, it's improved viewfinder, and many other details of its design. 
Terrific camera indeed. 

The new Fuji looks good in the photos too, although a little more "Nikon Df"ish 
in design and layout. 

The 'mirrorless' world is growing nicely with these and the Sony A7/A7r as 
well. 

Godfrey

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Steve Cottrell  wrote:
> 
> Was at a press event at a hospital today and noticed one of the snappers
> who normally wields huge bags of Canon gear had a smallish black camera
> around his neck. At a distance I could have sworn it was a film camera -
> in fact I thought for a second it was an MX! Had some sort of pancake on
> the front and he was getting some wide angle type shots judging from his
> positioning.
> 
> It was the Oly OM-D and my heart skipped a beat. WOW what a looker. Yes
> yes I know they are only tools Godders but gimme a break eh! That was
> camera porn alright. I was mightily impressed. Was curious to see what
> the EVF was like, didn't have time to stop and chat. The actual *size*
> of it was compelling. No huge DSLR chunkiness.
> 
> There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.
> 
> My attention has been had.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Ann Sanfedele]

goodness!  he does look well um rather unfriendly!

you captured that very well.

ann

On 1/23/2014 19:17, Walt wrote:

He's rotten to the core in a way that few can fathom -- a rarity.

-- Walt


On 1/23/2014 5:55 PM, John wrote:

Given the value of a plug nickel, what makes him so "valuable"?

On 1/23/2014 4:52 PM, Walt wrote:

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug
nickel.

Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)








--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

> From: Bill 
>
> A couple of things:
> 1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should be
> as unmanipulated as possible.
> 2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make
> manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being
> presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?

Was that the case here? What was the subject of the photo? The soldier
or the video camera?

If I pick up a candy bar wrapper that's littering the foreground in a
landscape shot is that wrong? No. If I clone it out afterwards when I
notice it. Is that wrong? No.

This wasn't a case of a photographer manipulating a photo with intent
to mislead the viewer. It was case of cloning out an unimportant
element. What viewer looked at it and thought, 'Wow there's supposed
to be a video camera down in the corner'?


>
> We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude to
> look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our perception
> of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes extreme contrast
> manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing or adding subject
> matter, in fact anything that is done with the intention of obscuring
> what was actually in front of the camera.
> For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to
> alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive manipulation.
>
> bill

Come now, come now. You make me spit my wine out! Mr. Lens Inventory.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Product shots with an overhead light panel

[Bruce Walker]

Very nice, Darren. You've made the products look quite attractive.

On the cardboard box subject, I'd brighten the front more than the top
since presumably the emphasis should be that all-important product
label.

I don't like the fade-to-white look of the bowl and brush, but that's
a personal pref. Why not leave the background black?

If you are going to try using the Bowens stuff I'd highly recommend
you get a radio trigger kit. They aren't necessarily pricey (I use
Amazon/eBay ones for $10 each) and they make setup a whole lot easier.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Darren Addy  wrote:
> This is a bit of a departure for me, but I'm attempting to up my game
> in some of the product photography I do at my place of employment.
> Most of what we have done has been quick-n-dirty single on camera
> flash and then remove all the background in Photoshop (which can be
> tedious work).
>
> For this product (which is for hair stylists) I wanted something that
> looked a bit more "high fashion". So I went with a black background
> and splashed some color on it for this one. I was going for the
> product reflection below the product look and used a 36" square
> overhead light panel that I fashioned out of PVC and a shower liner.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110216206/
> (This box is a mock-up, so doesn't look perfect, but you get the idea).
>
> The 2nd shot is combination of color, black, and transparent which is
> a bit of a challenge to photograph. The overhead panel does a nice
> job, when placed properly of giving you those big reflections that
> look "rich". I'm going to try to reshoot this on Monday on a white
> tabletop, which should help fill in the deep shadows on the colored
> bowl.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110209376/
>
> Comments and criticism welcome.
>
>
>
> --
> Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs
> look like photographs.
> ~ Alfred Stieglitz
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Product shots with an overhead light panel

[Ann Sanfedele]

If you are doing straight product work, the first serves nicely , I 
think...

I'll take a wild guess and say the client wouldn't like the second.. the
style detracts from the subject.

ann



On 1/23/2014 19:27, Darren Addy wrote:

This is a bit of a departure for me, but I'm attempting to up my game
in some of the product photography I do at my place of employment.
Most of what we have done has been quick-n-dirty single on camera
flash and then remove all the background in Photoshop (which can be
tedious work).

For this product (which is for hair stylists) I wanted something that
looked a bit more "high fashion". So I went with a black background
and splashed some color on it for this one. I was going for the
product reflection below the product look and used a 36" square
overhead light panel that I fashioned out of PVC and a shower liner.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110216206/
(This box is a mock-up, so doesn't look perfect, but you get the idea).

The 2nd shot is combination of color, black, and transparent which is
a bit of a challenge to photograph. The overhead panel does a nice
job, when placed properly of giving you those big reflections that
look "rich". I'm going to try to reshoot this on Monday on a white
tabletop, which should help fill in the deep shadows on the colored
bowl.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110209376/

Comments and criticism welcome.





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Tom C]

From: Igor Roshchin 

> I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
> The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
> whatever the photo presents.

> It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
> the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
> modification.
> While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
> when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
> But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
> it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
> photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
> on a part of the photograph.

> I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
> but that's totally different.
> I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
> molehill.

> Thu Jan 23 13:11:02 EST 2014
> Mark Roberts wrote:

> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-23/pulitzer-photographer-narciso-conteras-fired-syria-ap/5215200

I agree. If the content removed from an image did not add to the
meaningful information conveyed, then removing it did not subtract
from the meaningful information either and it's still journalistically
'truthful'.

It's ridiculous to moralize on something so trivial when news and
journalistic organizations routinely use file photos to illustrate a
story. Often those photos are far removed from the time and place the
story is about and can be very misleading, yet that's OK and removing
a distracting element is not?   Seems like a double standard to me.

 If the image was a little wider and the video camera could have been
cropped instead of cloned...that's as much a manipulation, as is
cropping in the viewfinder.

I agree with Misere, if words can be edited and changed, to craft the
story, then the same standard should apply to images.

Misleading with an image is obviously wrong.

Photos are not truth and never were.

Tom C.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT Question and an FS - is it Friday in the Antipodes?

[Ann Sanfedele]

Of course while you mention 107 items - maybe some of those _are_
done there.. the calendars you would think would be easy - or
specific t shirts, or a poster print.  At least you see them.

a

On 1/23/2014 18:30, Brian Walters wrote:


Quoting Ann Sanfedele :


Thanks, Brian
Interesting - I had thought that whatever was listed on the Australia
site would have appeared on items that were mfg down there - since the
design is in jpg or png format and floats around in cyberspace.



Yeah, you'd think so.  Blurb now prints in Australia.





and good morning!



Thank you - and good evening to you!




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Ann Sanfedele]

Ah ha! so I see!
ann

On 1/23/2014 18:23, Bob W wrote:

http://treadingonlego.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/station-4.jpg



On 23 Jan 2014, at 22:50, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:

I likes it.. just right.

will there be a bear when you get there?

ann


On 1/23/2014 17:36, Don Guthrie wrote:
I like the POV & the timing. Is the Fuji consistent with the look or do
you do any post? It is jpg you are working with?

pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote:

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:43:34 +
From: "Steve Cottrell"
To: "pentax list"
Subject: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014
Message-ID:<20140123214334.595152...@newsmtp.blacknight.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10






-- Cheers, Cotty


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Dinon, Monday afternoon

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Great timing with the pedestrian, and overall a very effective shot.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Rick Womer  wrote:
> Another from last March: Dinon is a medieval town in Brittany, and on Mondays 
> (in March, anyway) it's VERY quiet.  We walked the streets all day, and saw 
> few other people. This was near the center of town, just after mid-day:
>
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17661143
>
> or
>
> http://gallery.photo.net/photo/17661143-lg.jpg
>
>
>
> http://photo.net/photos/RickW
>
> (K-5, DA 16-45)
>
> Comments?
>
> Rick
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT: Chasing Ice

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Saw this documentary about the work of James Balog recently.  It shows
a really devoted photographer at work, and is extremely interesting
for his subject matter of the disappearing glaciers of the Arctic.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1579361/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIZTMVNBjc4

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Speaking of Journalists

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Great Catch!

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:
> Seen at the NAIAS: Jimmy Olsen, cub reporter. Wanted to ask, why the costume? 
> But didn’t get a chance to do so.
> http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17660034
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Daniel J. Matyola]

AW!

That is so cute.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Walt  wrote:
> We have one of your shepherds:
>
> http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large
>
> His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
> household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.
>
> Yours truly,
>
> -- Walt (on behalf of the USA)
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Ice Forms

[Daniel J. Matyola]

Interesting patterns on the lake!

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:08 PM, knarf  wrote:
> Now that we've had a couple of days of real cold the Lake is starting to 
> freeze near the shore in places:
>
> http://knarfdummyblog.blogspot.ca/2014/01/ice-forms.html?m=1
>
> Hope you enjoy. Comments welcome.
>
> Cheers,
> frank
> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Speaking of Journalists

[Paul Stenquist]

Seen at the NAIAS: Jimmy Olsen, cub reporter. Wanted to ask, why the costume? 
But didn’t get a chance to do so.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17660034
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Endless

[Daniel J. Matyola]

I really like that image, Frank.  It conveys a strong feeling of
loneliness and solitude.

Dan Matyola
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:51 PM, knarf  wrote:
> Another shot from the shore of Lake Ontario today:
>
> http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2014/01/endless.html?m=1
>
> Hope you enjoy. Comments always welcome.
>
> Cheers,
> frank
> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Back in the U S of A

[Mark Roberts]

Miserere wrote:

>Funny thing is, everybody always assumes I do astrophotography. I have
>to explain to them that I have a car, a mortgage, a wife, and now a
>kid, so no, I don't do astrophotography :-D Our own Darren Addy has
>started down the slippery slope of astrophotography and I hope he's
>able to stop before it's too late.

The primary requirement to be an astrophotographer, I'm convinced, has
nothing to do with knowledge of astrophysics but is in fact a severe
case of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Several of the photos — taken
by amateurs, mind — were the result of hours-long exposure times,
taken in multiple exposures over a period of months, all while keeping
the telescope/camera rig properly aligned to within a thousandth of a
gnat's hair.

Lovely to see the results but not the kind of photography I could do.

My photos of London and Oxford coming soon...

 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO: Product shots with an overhead light panel

[Darren Addy]

This is a bit of a departure for me, but I'm attempting to up my game
in some of the product photography I do at my place of employment.
Most of what we have done has been quick-n-dirty single on camera
flash and then remove all the background in Photoshop (which can be
tedious work).

For this product (which is for hair stylists) I wanted something that
looked a bit more "high fashion". So I went with a black background
and splashed some color on it for this one. I was going for the
product reflection below the product look and used a 36" square
overhead light panel that I fashioned out of PVC and a shower liner.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110216206/
(This box is a mock-up, so doesn't look perfect, but you get the idea).

The 2nd shot is combination of color, black, and transparent which is
a bit of a challenge to photograph. The overhead panel does a nice
job, when placed properly of giving you those big reflections that
look "rich". I'm going to try to reshoot this on Monday on a white
tabletop, which should help fill in the deep shadows on the colored
bowl.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelsmithy/12110209376/

Comments and criticism welcome.



-- 
Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs
look like photographs.
~ Alfred Stieglitz

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT - New Polaroid 'Camera'

[Brian Walters]

Say Cheese...

http://tinyurl.com/p2cvlhw


--
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Walt]

He's rotten to the core in a way that few can fathom -- a rarity.

-- Walt


On 1/23/2014 5:55 PM, John wrote:

Given the value of a plug nickel, what makes him so "valuable"?

On 1/23/2014 4:52 PM, Walt wrote:

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug 
nickel.


Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Walt]

On 1/23/2014 5:39 PM, Brian Walters wrote:

Quoting Walt :


We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert 
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug 
nickel.




Cute little fur ball, but you should have called him Bazza, Gazza or 
Jimbo


Alas, he was named by decree of my great-niece. There's no going back, now.

-- Walt




 --
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Walt]

I'll have to give it some thought. ;)


On 1/23/2014 5:25 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:

A! Too cute. Don't give him back. :-)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Walt  wrote:

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.

Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Paul Stenquist]

Times photogs can crop as long as the intent isn't misrepresentation of who or 
what was present. Straightening horizons is okay as well.
IMO, once the photog takes off the journalism hat, anything goes.There's not a 
lot of art or even joy in merely documenting reality.

Paul via phone

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 6:58 PM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 05:30:59PM -0600, Bill wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2014 2:08 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
>>> The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
>>> whatever the photo presents.
>>> 
>>> It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
>>> the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
>>> modification.
>>> While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
>>> when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
>>> But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
>>> it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
>>> photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
>>> on a part of the photograph.
>>> 
>>> I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
>>> but that's totally different.
>>> I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
>>> molehill.
>> 
>> A couple of things:
>> 1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should
>> be as unmanipulated as possible.
>> 2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make
>> manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being
>> presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?
>> 
>> We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude
>> to look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our
>> perception of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes
>> extreme contrast manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing
>> or adding subject matter, in fact anything that is done with the
>> intention of obscuring what was actually in front of the camera.
>> For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to
>> alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive
>> manipulation.
> 
> You forgot about cropping out things that you don't want visible
> in the final photo, and carefully composing the shot so that those
> details aren't even in the picture in the first place.
> 
> Tools like photoshop just make it easier to perform some of the
> sorts of subterfuge that photographers have been doing for 
> decades.
> 
>> 
>> bill
>> 
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
> 
> -- 
> Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Back in the U S of A

[Miserere]

On 20 January 2014 20:24, Mark Roberts  wrote:
>
> Hi, boys and girls! We're back form old blighty after a splendid week
> in London with brief excursions to Milton Keynes and Oxford.
>
> We toured Blechley Park with Bob W and Chris Mitchell and his wife and
> had a fascinating look at the code breakers' headquarters and then a
> nice bit of dinner & wine in Milton Keynes. We chatted a lot about the
> rest of you on the PDML and laughed at several of you behind your
> backs. Jolly good fun!
>
> Wednesday was the trip to Oxford and a meet-up with Cotty and wife.
> Japanese food for lunch and a brief tour of the "800 Years of Medical
> History at Oxford" exhibit. Dr. Lisa was impressed.
>
> Other relevant and irrelevant items of interest: The Wildlife
> Photographer of the Year exhibit at the Natural History Museum. We've
> seen it in many previous years but this one was the bet yet. Truly
> outstanding stuff. And the kid's division(s) looked more like the
> photos really had been taken by the ages indicated (rather than daddy
> setting up the camera/lens/tripod and junior pressing the shutter
> button when instructed). The Astronomy Photographer of the year
> exhibit at the observatory in Greenwich was fairly small but
> absolutely breathtaking. The effort and preparation that these amateur
> astrophotographers put in is humbling. Brilliant stuff all astronomers
> should see (you getting this, Miserere?)


Got it! I'll go right ahead and book a plane ticket to go see it! :-p

Funny thing is, everybody always assumes I do astrophotography. I have
to explain to them that I have a car, a mortgage, a wife, and now a
kid, so no, I don't do astrophotography :-D Our own Darren Addy has
started down the slippery slope of astrophotography and I hope he's
able to stop before it's too late.


> Turner exhibit in Greenwich was superb. He's one of my favorite
> artists and this didn't disappoint. We also saw the Spencer exhibit at
> Somerset House and enjoyed that a lot.
>
> The Hunterian Museum at the Royal College of Surgeons was a high point
> for Dr. Lisa. It held my attention for half an hour or so but she was
> enthralled and could have spent a day there. She's just been reading a
> superb book about Hunter
> (http://www.amazon.com/The-Knife-Man-Snatching-Surgery/dp/0767916530)
> and has been astonished by the work he did in the 18th century –
> brilliant man. We'll be back to this one on future visits.
>
> If you visit London and like books you absolutely must visit Daunt
> Books on Marylebone High Street. Fabulous book shop. Impressive
> building. Nice people.
>
> Photographically I ran the gamut from HCB-style street shooting to
> overprocessed HDR photography and everything in between. London and
> Oxford are both fabulous places for photography and, for my purposes,
> particularly at night. I'm doing more and more experimentation with
> the third dimension of photography, time, using long exposures and/or
> multiple exposures. I was traveling without a tripod and I really
> enjoy the challenge of finding a spot to rest or brace the camera and
> then work out the composition by trial and error. I had a blast and
> got some pretty good stuff, I think/hope.
>
> I did almost all my shooting with the DA 12-24 (which saw the most
> use) and the DA-L 55-300, the latter purchased specifically for this
> trip. It's supposed to be sold only with a camera body as part of a
> kit but some dealers break up the kits and sell body and lens
> separately. The lens was $179 new, including shipping. It lacks the
> quick-shift focus of the DA version and has a plastic lens mount but
> it's the same optically, which is to say, superb. An amazing lens and
> highly recommended. The 21mm Ltd also saw a little use.
>
> Now I'm getting ready for the start of school on Wednesday and since
> I'm teaching Digital Design again, a course I haven't taught in a few
> semesters, I'll be fairly busy, so it'll be a while before I get a UK
> photo gallery up (I also have the PDML Photo Annual to contend with).
> Hang on, because I think it'll be worth the wait.


I'll be right here, sitting down, waiting to see your photos of my
hometown. You better do the city justice!

Cheers,


   —M.

\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com

http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Miserere]

I hope this keeps happening until everyone figures out that there is
an art to journalistic photography, and sometimes you need to edit out
shit that distracts from the message.

Do news editors not edit the text in written pieces to make the story
"tighter", "more compelling", "more gripping", "more concise", etc? So
why are image journalists held to a different, more restrictive
standard?

Cheers,


   —M.

\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com

http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment



On 23 January 2014 15:08, Igor Roshchin  wrote:
>
> I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
> The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
> whatever the photo presents.
>
> It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
> the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
> modification.
> While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
> when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
> But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
> it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
> photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
> on a part of the photograph.
>
> I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
> but that's totally different.
> I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
> molehill.
>
> Igor
>
>
> Thu Jan 23 13:11:02 EST 2014
> Mark Roberts wrote:
>
>> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-23/pulitzer-photographer-narciso-conteras-fired-syria-ap/5215200
>
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Miserere]

< rant >There is no such thing as *the* OM-D; there is the OM-D E-M5,
OM-D E-M1, and soon OM-D E-M10, but no "the OM-D", the same way there
is no "the Ford" car or "the Airbus" aeroplane or "the Pentax" forum.
< /rant >

So which one was it, Cotty? E-M5 or E-M1? Nifty machines, huh?

And yes, I've been salivating at that upcoming Fuji X-T1 too. It looks
just like the LXD I hoped Pentax would release someday... Sigh...


   —M.

\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com

http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment




On 23 January 2014 17:01, Steve Cottrell  wrote:
> Was at a press event at a hospital today and noticed one of the snappers
> who normally wields huge bags of Canon gear had a smallish black camera
> around his neck. At a distance I could have sworn it was a film camera -
> in fact I thought for a second it was an MX! Had some sort of pancake on
> the front and he was getting some wide angle type shots judging from his
> positioning.
>
> It was the Oly OM-D and my heart skipped a beat. WOW what a looker. Yes
> yes I know they are only tools Godders but gimme a break eh! That was
> camera porn alright. I was mightily impressed. Was curious to see what
> the EVF was like, didn't have time to stop and chat. The actual *size*
> of it was compelling. No huge DSLR chunkiness.
>
> There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.
>
> My attention has been had.
>
> --
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
>
>
> ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
> ||  (O)  |Web Video Production
> --
> _
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

A Camera for Jim King

[Miserere]

I have a camera for Jim King. Behold the King Jim camera!:

http://akihabaranews.com/2014/01/15/article-en/king-jim-camera-equipped-mouse-1534514126

It even comes with an accessory mouse, ahem.

:-)

Cheers,


   —M.

\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com

http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Larry Colen]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 05:30:59PM -0600, Bill wrote:
> On 23/01/2014 2:08 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
> >
> >I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
> >The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
> >whatever the photo presents.
> >
> >It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
> >the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
> >modification.
> >While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
> >when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
> >But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
> >it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
> >photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
> >on a part of the photograph.
> >
> >I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
> >but that's totally different.
> >I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
> >molehill.
> 
> A couple of things:
> 1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should
> be as unmanipulated as possible.
> 2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make
> manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being
> presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?
> 
> We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude
> to look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our
> perception of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes
> extreme contrast manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing
> or adding subject matter, in fact anything that is done with the
> intention of obscuring what was actually in front of the camera.
> For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to
> alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive
> manipulation.

You forgot about cropping out things that you don't want visible
in the final photo, and carefully composing the shot so that those
details aren't even in the picture in the first place.

Tools like photoshop just make it easier to perform some of the
sorts of subterfuge that photographers have been doing for 
decades.

> 
> bill
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[John]

Given the value of a plug nickel, what makes him so "valuable"?

On 1/23/2014 4:52 PM, Walt wrote:

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.

Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Whitebird

[Brian Walters]

Quoting Bob W :


On 23 Jan 2014, at 20:35, Brian Walters  wrote:


Quoting David Mann :

Here's the first one from our trip.  We stopped at the Ashburton  
Domain aviary to see their albino blackbird.


It's a bit of a strange crop but the rest of the frame wasn't very  
interesting except for the parrot.


http://gallery.multi.net.nz/photo/724/#peso




Interesting colour variation.  But blackbirds of any colour are  
still a pain in the arse...




That's not where you're supposed to put them.



Apparently I've been misinformed...


--
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Is this photo reminiscent of Paul's?

[John]

I don't see the resemblance other than both photos being B&W head-shots.

On 1/23/2014 3:25 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:



Following a link from a recently posted here article, I saw the photo of
an old man here:
http://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/05/friday-happy-hour-portraits-of-life-over-80-more/
and it caused some mixed thoughts.

To me, it looked like a copy-cat one ("20 years later") of the famous
Paul's photo, albeit not on par with the original:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3451662&size=lg

Am I the only one who has such a reaction?

Igor




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Brian Walters]

Quoting Bill :


On 23/01/2014 4:07 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:

On 23/1/14, Steve Cottrell, discombobulated, unleashed:



There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.

My attention has been had.




More camera porn!




Damn you Cotty. You probably just cost me a pile of money.





"Back to the Future" camera styling seems to be gaining momentum.  So  
what chance (apart from Buckley's) of a digital LX?



--
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Brian Walters]

Quoting Walt :


We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert  
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug  
nickel.




Cute little fur ball, but you should have called him Bazza, Gazza or Jimbo


 --
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 4:07 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:

On 23/1/14, Steve Cottrell, discombobulated, unleashed:



There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.

My attention has been had.




More camera porn!




Damn you Cotty. You probably just cost me a pile of money.

bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Is this photo reminiscent of Paul's?

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 2:25 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:



Following a link from a recently posted here article, I saw the photo of
an old man here:
http://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/05/friday-happy-hour-portraits-of-life-over-80-more/
and it caused some mixed thoughts.

To me, it looked like a copy-cat one ("20 years later") of the famous
Paul's photo, albeit not on par with the original:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3451662&size=lg

Am I the only one who has such a reaction?

Igor



Pity the photographer decided to screw up his picture.

bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Whitebird

[Bob W]

On 23 Jan 2014, at 20:35, Brian Walters  wrote:
> 
> Quoting David Mann :
> 
>> Here's the first one from our trip.  We stopped at the Ashburton Domain 
>> aviary to see their albino blackbird.
>> 
>> It's a bit of a strange crop but the rest of the frame wasn't very 
>> interesting except for the parrot.
>> 
>> http://gallery.multi.net.nz/photo/724/#peso
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting colour variation.  But blackbirds of any colour are still a pain 
> in the arse...
> 

That's not where you're supposed to put them.

B
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bill]

On 23/01/2014 2:08 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:


I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
whatever the photo presents.

It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
modification.
While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
on a part of the photograph.

I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
but that's totally different.
I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
molehill.


A couple of things:
1) It's a matter of principal. It's a news photo, and thusly should be 
as unmanipulated as possible.
2) Where is the slippery slope? When does it become not OK to make 
manipulations? Are we OK with not knowing if an image we are being 
presented with is a representation of the real thing or not?


We aren't talking about a family portrait where we expect Aunt Maude to 
look 10 years younger, and any manipulation that alters our perception 
of the image is wrong, plain and simple. This includes extreme contrast 
manipulation, extreme dodging and burning, removing or adding subject 
matter, in fact anything that is done with the intention of obscuring 
what was actually in front of the camera.
For myself, even using really long or really short focal lengths to 
alter the image from a normal perspective can be an excessive manipulation.


bill

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Hint for exposure metering for videos with Pentax DSLR

[Bruce Walker]

Were it I shooting video, I'd meter the scene and set the camera on
manual at that setting. There's nothing more annoying than having the
exposure changing throughout some footage. That goes for WB too.

Unless, of course, it's just the filmic equivalent of a snapshot. Then
Auto everything and go for it.


On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Igor Roshchin  wrote:
>
> Maybe this will be helpful to others:
>
> I found that when there is a high contrast between the main
> subject and the background (e.g. dark-clothed people with a white wall
> in the background),
> if the exposure is set to the central-point (as I frequently do when I
> shoot still images) or to the focal point, then the motion of
> "focus object" can cause rapid changes of the brightness of the video.
>
> So, it is better to have the exposure set to the full-frame,center-weighted
> mode (green rectangle).
> In this case, the brightness doesn't fluctuate widely, when the object is
> moving (e.g. dancing).
>
> I don't know how this applies to K3, as I observed it with a K-5
> (and probably K-7).
>
> Igor
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT Question and an FS - is it Friday in the Antipodes?

[Brian Walters]

Quoting Ann Sanfedele :


Thanks, Brian
Interesting - I had thought that whatever was listed on the  
Australia site would have appeared on items that were mfg down there  
- since the design is in jpg or png format and floats around in  
cyberspace.



Yeah, you'd think so.  Blurb now prints in Australia.





and good morning!



Thank you - and good evening to you!


--
Cheers

Brian

++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Bruce]

Nicely done.  I like it as well.

--
Bruce


Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 1:43 PM, "Steve Cottrell"  wrote:
> 
> Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
> exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
> one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>  Cotty
> 
> 
> ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
> ||  (O)  |Web Video Production
> --
> _
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Bruce Walker]

A! Too cute. Don't give him back. :-)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Walt  wrote:
> We have one of your shepherds:
>
> http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large
>
> His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert
> household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.
>
> Yours truly,
>
> -- Walt (on behalf of the USA)
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Bob W]

http://treadingonlego.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/station-4.jpg


> On 23 Jan 2014, at 22:50, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
> 
> I likes it.. just right.
> 
> will there be a bear when you get there?
> 
> ann
> 
>> On 1/23/2014 17:36, Don Guthrie wrote:
>> I like the POV & the timing. Is the Fuji consistent with the look or do
>> you do any post? It is jpg you are working with?
>> 
>> pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote:
>>> Message: 9
>>> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:43:34 +
>>> From: "Steve Cottrell"
>>> To: "pentax list"
>>> Subject: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014
>>> Message-ID:<20140123214334.595152...@newsmtp.blacknight.co.uk>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>> 
>>> Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
>>> exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
>>> one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- Cheers, Cotty
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Endless

[Walt]

Another nice one, Frank!

I'm a sucker for a solemn photographic mood, and you certainly captured 
one here.


-- Walt


On 1/22/2014 9:51 PM, knarf wrote:

Another shot from the shore of Lake Ontario today:

http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2014/01/endless.html?m=1

Hope you enjoy. Comments always welcome.

Cheers,
frank
“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Bruce Walker]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Stanley Halpin
 wrote:
>
> I am glad you commented Paul - I was wondering whether you worked
> under the same sort of strictures. It must be tough to maintain two separate
> work flows. PJ work where what you take is what you live with, and then
> everything else where all of the digital tools for image enhancement can be
> brought to bear. If nothing else I guess that it disciplines you to try and 
> get
> every shot right the first time…

I get every shot right the first time. Then in post I add some left,
middle, top, bottom, front and back to suit me.

-- 
-bmw

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Ice Forms

[Walt]

Nice shot, Frank!

As others have said, I wonder how it would look in B/W. Actually, it 
struck me as curious that you didn't do that by default.


Either way, though, I like it.

-- Walt


On 1/22/2014 8:08 PM, knarf wrote:

Now that we've had a couple of days of real cold the Lake is starting to freeze 
near the shore in places:

http://knarfdummyblog.blogspot.ca/2014/01/ice-forms.html?m=1

Hope you enjoy. Comments welcome.

Cheers,
frank
“Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel






--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Endless

[Bruce]

I like the shot but I think a tighter crop would strengthen it.  Take off the 
bottom that foreground before the dark area and take some off the top to 
balance.  Good work.

--
Bruce

Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 22, 2014, at 7:51 PM, knarf  wrote:
> 
> Another shot from the shore of Lake Ontario today:
> 
> http://knarfinthecity.blogspot.ca/2014/01/endless.html?m=1
> 
> Hope you enjoy. Comments always welcome.
> 
> Cheers, 
> frank
> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Ice Forms

[Bruce]

If you keep this up we are going to question if you are a street shooter...very 
nice shot!  Composition is great and the overall mood really works well.

--
Bruce


Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 22, 2014, at 6:08 PM, knarf  wrote:
> 
> Now that we've had a couple of days of real cold the Lake is starting to 
> freeze near the shore in places:
> 
> http://knarfdummyblog.blogspot.ca/2014/01/ice-forms.html?m=1
> 
> Hope you enjoy. Comments welcome.
> 
> Cheers,
> frank
> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[James King]

Steve Cottrell posted on Thu, 23 Jan 2014 14:02:18 -0800:

(snip)

> There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.

> 

> My attention has been had.

I’m really eager to see what Fuji brings - I’m loving my X-E2 but am interested 
in a MILC with a larger EVF.  Wonder what other features Fuji will deliver?

Regards, Jim



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Bruce]

When you create an album to upload to, there is an option to make it Hi-Res.  
All images uploaded to it are not mangled as badly.

--
Bruce

Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 23, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Bruce Walker  wrote:
> 
> Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
> quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
> you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
> files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.
> 
> http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix
> 
> -- 
> -bmw
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.
> 

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Walt]

Very nice, Cotty.

I like the mood of the dark figure of the lone commuter. I wouldn't have 
expected that in London.


Did you tell everyone else to get the hell out of your frame?

-- Walt


On 1/23/2014 3:43 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:

Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10









--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Whitebird

[David Mann]

On Jan 24, 2014, at 9:35 am, Brian Walters  wrote:

> Quoting David Mann :
> 
>> Here's the first one from our trip.  We stopped at the Ashburton Domain 
>> aviary to see their albino blackbird.
>> 
>> It's a bit of a strange crop but the rest of the frame wasn't very 
>> interesting except for the parrot.
>> 
>> http://gallery.multi.net.nz/photo/724/#peso
> 
> Interesting colour variation.  But blackbirds of any colour are still a pain 
> in the arse...

Yeah they like to mulch our paths but I'm still quite fond of them.  There's 
one having a swim in our birdbath at the moment.

Cheers,
Dave


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO: Low Rainbow

[David Mann]

On Jan 24, 2014, at 9:26 am, Brian Walters  wrote:

> Quoting David Mann :
> 
>> I was walking along the lake shore in Wanaka when I spotted a rainbow...
>> 
>> http://gallery.multi.net.nz/photo/732/#peso
> 
> Very appealing image but that's a very subtle rainbow.  Probably need to see 
> the image larger to fully appreciate it.

Unfortunately it's a cellphone pic so it's about the best I could do.  I 
already increased the saturation in Photoshop to try and bring it out a bit 
more!

I have some nicer pics of the lake to share after I edit them :)

Cheers,
Dave


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Ann Sanfedele]

I likes it.. just right.

will there be a bear when you get there?

ann

On 1/23/2014 17:36, Don Guthrie wrote:

I like the POV & the timing. Is the Fuji consistent with the look or do
you do any post? It is jpg you are working with?

pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote:

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:43:34 +
From: "Steve Cottrell"
To: "pentax list"
Subject: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014
Message-ID:<20140123214334.595152...@newsmtp.blacknight.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10






-- Cheers, Cotty





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Igor Roshchin]

I saw one two weeks ago, at Denver Fusion Exchange.
Rob Studdert mentioned OM-D E-M1 to me and Larry last month, 
referring to a photographer using it for shooting some latin dances, and
the quick AF that he was impressed by.
Rob was telling that Pentax wouldn't keep up with the OM-D.

So, I spoke with the camera's owner. To my surprise, he was complaining
about the AF in low light. 
... go figure! ;-)

Igor



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Ann Sanfedele]

Well I want all copies of any photo , whatever the format, to have the 
same info imbedded - and Larry actually mentioned a few good reasons - 
with me it is jsut a filing cabinet kind of thing


ann

On 1/23/2014 17:02, Paul Stenquist wrote:


On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:


Maybe I'm misusing the term meta-data..  if I save for web in
adobe photoshop 5.0 the camera data disappears. so perhaps camera data is not 
"meta-data”


You were correct. The camera data is meta data. I just don’t see the point of 
saving it when posting to the web. But I’m sure there are situations where it’s 
desirable.

Paul


ann

On 1/23/2014 16:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:


On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:


OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.

I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.

ann


I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
informational specs as far as I know. To the best of my knowledge it doesn’t 
affect the image. And you can dial in the parameters on “save for web” to give 
you just the kind of jpeg compression and color space you want.

Paul


On 1/23/2014 14:57, Bruce Walker wrote:

Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.

http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Steve Cottrell]

On 23/1/14, Don Guthrie, discombobulated, unleashed:

>I like the POV & the timing. Is the Fuji consistent with the look or do 
>you do any post? It is jpg you are working with?

I shoot jpegs in camera. I have several settings for colour and mono.
With mono I have 2 settings on custom functions dial (C1 and C2) that i
can select quickly. C1 (this pic) is my favourite. Harsh and grainy,
high auto-ISO with increased contrast. A 'Theriaultian' setting, if you
will. My default black and white setting. 4000X2664 (3:2) pixels.

Into PS and I just give it a levels hit but it never adjusts much, and
often I will leave it as is. I didn't crop this one at all, which is
slightly unusual for me as the optical VF of the camera only covers
about 85% and I find myself cropping in a bit to match what I saw. I try
and compensate when shooting but it never quite works. I sometimes shoot
with the LCD but only when I can't get my eye to the finder, or it's a
low or high level shot (viewing angle on the LCD is sensational).

For web I pop it down to 1000 or 1200 pixels across and apply a tad of
sharpening.

It reminds me so much of Ilford HP5. I'm really just carrying on where I
left off 25 years ago!

Thanks for looking.

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Don Guthrie]

I like the POV & the timing. Is the Fuji consistent with the look or do 
you do any post? It is jpg you are working with?


pdml-requ...@pdml.net wrote:

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:43:34 +
From: "Steve Cottrell"
To: "pentax list"
Subject: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014
Message-ID:<20140123214334.595152...@newsmtp.blacknight.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10






-- Cheers, Cotty



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Ann Sanfedele]

Well I went back and did a save for web on a file and learned that I 
could see the camera data.. and copyright..


Hmmm... wonder if that was so way back in elements 2.0 and I just never 
checked again.  someonw lingering in the back of my socalled brain I 
read something about saving in jpg but not jpg for web was better

or necessary for some things but if that meta data stuff wasn't it
I'm not sure ... maybe jsut stuff related to compression.

ann

On 1/23/2014 16:39, Mark Roberts wrote:

Paul Stenquist wrote:



I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
informational specs as far as I know.


With recent versions of Photoshop you can choose what metadata is
retained and what is discarded when you "Save for Web".
You can choose:
• Just copyright data
• Copyright and contact info (this is what I do)
• Everything except camera data
• All metadata
• None at all




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Larry Colen]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 05:02:04PM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> 
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
> 
> > Maybe I'm misusing the term meta-data..  if I save for web in
> > adobe photoshop 5.0 the camera data disappears. so perhaps camera data is 
> > not "meta-data”
> > 
> You were correct. The camera data is meta data. I just don’t see the point of 
> saving it when posting to the web. But I’m sure there are situations where 
> it’s desirable.

Several reasons:

When looking at photos on flickr, particularly via fluidr, it can be
interesting to see what the settings were.

The meta data can make it easier to find when someone "steals" one of 
your photos, if they don't clear it out.  

If someone likes one of your photos, things like the date in the metadata
can help you find the original in your raw data storage, particularly
if they just send you the (possibly renamed) jpeg that they downloaded
off the web.

> 
> Paul
> 
> > ann
> > 
> > On 1/23/2014 16:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.
> >>> 
> >>> I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
> >>> but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.
> >>> 
> >>> ann
> >> 
> >> I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
> >> informational specs as far as I know. To the best of my knowledge it 
> >> doesn’t affect the image. And you can dial in the parameters on “save for 
> >> web” to give you just the kind of jpeg compression and color space you 
> >> want.
> >> 
> >> Paul
> >>> 
> >>> On 1/23/2014 14:57, Bruce Walker wrote:
>  Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
>  quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
>  you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
>  files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.
>  
>  http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix
>  
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> >>> PDML@pdml.net
> >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> >>> follow the directions.
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > -- 
> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> > PDML@pdml.net
> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
> > follow the directions.
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Ann Sanfedele]

Well I'm just saying that's how I save files when I put them on face 
book - whether or no the 300 ppi or 72 ppi has practically "no meaning"



for my web page the images are 4 or 5 mgs 300ppi, and _if printed_ they 
would be, say, 12" x 8.  The same image, if I save it with a width of

800 px and a "resolution" of 72 ppi - is smaller. I also decrease
the file size (in jpg conversion from my dngs) to 10 but leave it
at no compression for my web page - where, of course, I hope people will
find things they want to buy.

I do get confused about the terms sometimes but regardless of my
possible misnaming terms, the files I submit to facebook are 
intentionally smaller.


ann



On 1/23/2014 16:24, Igor Roshchin wrote:


Ann, just in case:
"ppi" dor a digital image has practically no meaning.
That's definitely the case when you upload images to FB.
It's only the total number of pixels that matters.

Igor


Thu Jan 23 15:36:09 EST 2014
Ann Sanfedele wrote:


OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.

I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.

ann




--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Steve Cottrell]

On 23/1/14, Steve Cottrell, discombobulated, unleashed:

>
>There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.
>
>My attention has been had.



More camera porn!



-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Paul Stenquist]

On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:

> Maybe I'm misusing the term meta-data..  if I save for web in
> adobe photoshop 5.0 the camera data disappears. so perhaps camera data is not 
> "meta-data”
> 
You were correct. The camera data is meta data. I just don’t see the point of 
saving it when posting to the web. But I’m sure there are situations where it’s 
desirable.

Paul

> ann
> 
> On 1/23/2014 16:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>> 
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
>> 
>>> OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.
>>> 
>>> I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
>>> but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.
>>> 
>>> ann
>> 
>> I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
>> informational specs as far as I know. To the best of my knowledge it doesn’t 
>> affect the image. And you can dial in the parameters on “save for web” to 
>> give you just the kind of jpeg compression and color space you want.
>> 
>> Paul
>>> 
>>> On 1/23/2014 14:57, Bruce Walker wrote:
 Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
 quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
 you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
 files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.
 
 http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix
 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>>> follow the directions.
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

OT - Saw an Olympus OM-D in the Wild Today

[Steve Cottrell]

Was at a press event at a hospital today and noticed one of the snappers
who normally wields huge bags of Canon gear had a smallish black camera
around his neck. At a distance I could have sworn it was a film camera -
in fact I thought for a second it was an MX! Had some sort of pancake on
the front and he was getting some wide angle type shots judging from his
positioning.

It was the Oly OM-D and my heart skipped a beat. WOW what a looker. Yes
yes I know they are only tools Godders but gimme a break eh! That was
camera porn alright. I was mightily impressed. Was curious to see what
the EVF was like, didn't have time to stop and chat. The actual *size*
of it was compelling. No huge DSLR chunkiness.

There's a retro Fuji offering released in 5 days.

My attention has been had.

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Hint for exposure metering for videos with Pentax DSLR

[Igor Roshchin]

Maybe this will be helpful to others:

I found that when there is a high contrast between the main
subject and the background (e.g. dark-clothed people with a white wall
in the background), 
if the exposure is set to the central-point (as I frequently do when I 
shoot still images) or to the focal point, then the motion of 
"focus object" can cause rapid changes of the brightness of the video.

So, it is better to have the exposure set to the full-frame,center-weighted 
mode (green rectangle).
In this case, the brightness doesn't fluctuate widely, when the object is
moving (e.g. dancing).

I don't know how this applies to K3, as I observed it with a K-5 
(and probably K-7). 

Igor



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[David Parsons]

Camera data is metadata

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
> Maybe I'm misusing the term meta-data..  if I save for web in
> adobe photoshop 5.0 the camera data disappears. so perhaps camera data is
> not "meta-data"
>
> ann
>
>
> On 1/23/2014 16:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:
>>
>>> OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.
>>>
>>> I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
>>> but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.
>>>
>>> ann
>>
>>
>> I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is
>> informational specs as far as I know. To the best of my knowledge it doesn’t
>> affect the image. And you can dial in the parameters on “save for web” to
>> give you just the kind of jpeg compression and color space you want.
>>
>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/23/2014 14:57, Bruce Walker wrote:

 Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
 quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
 you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
 files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.


 http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix

>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> PDML@pdml.net
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
> follow the directions.



-- 
David Parsons Photography
http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com

Aloha Photographer Photoblog
http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Ann Sanfedele]

Maybe I'm misusing the term meta-data..  if I save for web in
adobe photoshop 5.0 the camera data disappears. so perhaps camera data 
is not "meta-data"


ann

On 1/23/2014 16:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:


On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Ann Sanfedele  wrote:


OTOH - improving the quality there may lead to more photo swiping.

I send Facebook on jpgs at 72 ppi and no larger than 800 px across..
but I don't do "save for web" because that clobbers some meta-data.

ann


I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
informational specs as far as I know. To the best of my knowledge it doesn’t 
affect the image. And you can dial in the parameters on “save for web” to give 
you just the kind of jpeg compression and color space you want.

Paul


On 1/23/2014 14:57, Bruce Walker wrote:

Photoshelter posted a nice article on how to get around the terrible
quality-mangling compression artifacts that Facebook introduces when
you upload images there. Curiously, the easy answer is upload PNG
files! Very counterintuitive, but apparently it helps.

http://blog.photoshelter.com/2014/01/facebook-photos-look-bad-diy-solution-fix



--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.





--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Steve Cottrell]

On 23/1/14, Attila Boros, discombobulated, unleashed:

>That's very nicely framed, I like the tracks leading into the image
>and the sign in the top right corner.

Thank you!

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
||  (O)  |Web Video Production
--
_



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

PESO: Dear Aussies . . .

[Walt]

We have one of your shepherds:

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/walt_gilbert/12108419024/#large

His name is Bear and he's the newest canine addition to the Gilbert 
household. You may have him back for the princely sum of one plug nickel.


Yours truly,

-- Walt (on behalf of the USA)

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: PESO - Lambeth North, London, 2014

[Attila Boros]

That's very nicely framed, I like the tracks leading into the image
and the sign in the top right corner.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Steve Cottrell  wrote:
> Went to London yesterday to see my son's contribution in a photo
> exhibition. Only shot a dozen frames the whole day. This is full frame,
> one moment, black and white, just how I like it. Fuji X10
>
> 
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Cheers,
>   Cotty
>
>
> ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
> ||  (O)  |Web Video Production
> --
> _
>
>
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: OT - how to avoid Facebook image mangling

[Paul Stenquist]

On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Mark Roberts  wrote:

> Paul Stenquist wrote:
> 
> 
>> I do “save for web” on all my web-sized images. The only meta data lost is 
>> informational specs as far as I know. 
> 
> With recent versions of Photoshop you can choose what metadata is
> retained and what is discarded when you "Save for Web". 
> You can choose:
> • Just copyright data
> • Copyright and contact info (this is what I do)
> • Everything except camera data
> • All metadata
> • None at all
> 
> — 

Good to know. I should save the copyright and contact info.

Paul
> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
> www.robertstech.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: SD Formatter

[Peter McIntosh]

On 24 January 2014 02:08, Aahz Maruch  wrote:
>
> Maybe not.  We rented some m43 equipment a few weeks ago, and the
> Panasonic GX7 was being weirdly slow about booting up and shutting down.
> Reformatting the SD card in the GX7 made it fast again.  Dunno whether
> doing the reformat in the computer would have done the same thing.
>

Sounds a bit like an issue I had with my Fuji X-S1.  After copying
images from the card to my iPad, the camera would show slow, erratic
behaviour when shooting with that card - delayed shutter response,
slow write speed, sometimes locking up.  Googling identified an issue
with iOS writing something back to the card during/after transfer
which caused much confuion for the camera; reformatting the card in
the camera, and turning on the write-lock tab when copying images to
the iPad stopped this behaviour.

Ciao,

Pete Mac in Melbourne

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: Another PJ in trouble for Photoshopping

[Stanley Halpin]

I am glad you commented Paul - I was wondering whether you worked under the 
same sort of strictures. It must be tough to maintain two separate work flows. 
PJ work where what you take is what you live with, and then everything else 
where all of the digital tools for image enhancement can be brought to bear. If 
nothing else I guess that it disciplines you to try and get every shot right 
the first time…

stan

On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Paul Stenquist  wrote:

> No retouching under any circumstances is standard policy for most respectable 
> news organizations. I’m not allowed to alter photos for The New York Times 
> and had to sign a contract to that effect. There was a hot spot in the door 
> of the Hyundai Genesis pic I shot at the auto show that i would have liked to 
> have removed, but couldn’t. I later provided the same photo to Assouline, a 
> book publisher, for a Hyundai book I’m working on. Before sending it to them, 
> I did some retouching. News is reality. Advertising and promotions are make 
> believe. Two different worlds, two different photographic standards.
> 
> {ai;
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 3:23 PM, Brian Walters  wrote:
> 
>> Quoting Igor Roshchin :
>> 
>>> I am not seeing what was the problem in what he did.
>>> The modification he did did not change the purpose of the photo or
>>> whatever the photo presents.
>>> 
>>> It brings back the question of what is and what is not "manipulation" of
>>> the photo. As "burning and dodging" is also image manipulation and
>>> modification.
>>> While I understand that one can defined the modification of an image
>>> when the actual pixels are replaced/moved.
>>> But what if he just darkened some portion of the photo with an object in
>>> it so that the object is deep in a shadow, and hence cannot be seen on the
>>> photo? That's not moving of the pixels, but just changing the levels
>>> on a part of the photograph.
>>> 
>>> I understand the problem when a person is removed from a group photo,
>>> but that's totally different.
>>> I think in this particular case, they are making a mountain out of a
>>> molehill.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> That was my reaction as well.  I understand that AP has strict guidelines 
>> but to completely ban him from working for them seems harsh.  I would have 
>> thought some lesser penalty, such as banning him for six months or so, would 
>> have got the massage across.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Brian
>> 
>> ++
>> Brian Walters
>> Western Sydney Australia
>> http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> PDML@pdml.net
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and 
>> follow the directions.
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.